On May 1, 2004, at 2:09 AM, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
Speaking only for myself, I found this comment interesting;
> It would pollute DOM with features that have no function when
> processing XML, as opposed to XOP. Processing XOP requires a XOP API,
> not an XML API.
XML allows base64-encoded content; indeed, this is a practice that is
encouraged by other recommendation-level W3C specifications. Is it too
difficult to believe that people creating or consuming documents
containing such content might actually want to work with the binary
data instead of its encoded form? I would think that use cases for such
data that explicitly focus on the encoded form are by far in the
minority (Digital Signature is the only significant one that comes to
mind immediately).
Regards,
--
Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO BEA Systems